We’re about six weeks from the 2018 NFLPA Contract Advisor exam, which means everyone headed to D.C. in July is (or should be) studying like a busy bee and doing everything possible to learn the CBA. And they should be. Many of them are already using the ITL practice agent exam to get ready; by the way, in about 10 days, we’ll have a second exam for aspiring agents to use.

Anyway, once we get past the test, there are a few things to know. For example, scouts are a big part of the game and always play a role in an agent’s success.

With that in mind, we reached out to several active NFL scouts (18, to be exact) and asked them this question: With a new agent class getting ready to take the exam next month, what’s one thing about new agents that makes your job harder? Is it a belief that their client is entitled to a workout/place on an NFL team? Is it the bombarding emails? Is it continually having to explain basic aspects of the draft process? Is it handling their intrusions at pro days? Is it their general lack of understanding of your job?

We got 15 responses, an incredibly high return on such a question. Obviously, we touched a nerve, though not all scouts had a negative reaction. Here are a few of their responses:

• “The toughest aspects are (that) guys not adjusting to the fact we have access to much more information, much earlier than in times past (so, yes, emails with fabricated or exaggerated 40 times, shuttles, etc. are annoying); integrity (and) doing what you say you’re going to in all areas (this ties in with their lack of ability to educate and manage their clients’ careers); and transparency (this likely can be an issue on the personnel side as well). Just being upfront about one, what the client wants or needs, and two, divulging information on the front end before things get out of hand, (is important).”
• “Surprisingly, the new agents are easier to work with than the old agents. The old agents think they know everything and they tend to push boundaries. The new agents generally are nervous and tend to ask more questions about the process and are willing to listen when they ask about one of their clients. They tend to be a little more passive at first so they can build relationships. . . that has been my experience with them.”
• “It would be the emails and the inability to understand that sometimes their guy just isn’t good and there’s no place on the roster for him. Sometimes they pound the table for the same guys for months and they’ll lose the scout.”
• “I deal with agents on the pro side. The guys I like dealing with the most are the ones who don’t bombard you with emails (I actually got an email from an agent the other day with a follow-up email stating he used the wrong template on the previous email and sent the wrong info on the wrong player). Accessibility and quick responses to phone calls are always appreciated, but don’t blow me up with texts and emails. I know they are working on behalf of their guys but I think there is a fine line between providing info and going too far and becoming annoying.  I respect what they do but I don’t need to be on an auto email list that sends me your available clients every day!”

This is just the tip of the iceberg. Besides their general unhappiness with the volume of emails new (really, most) agents send, there are other good points scouts made about what to do and not do to in dealing with teams, especially if you’re a new agent. Some even had positive things to say about new contract advisors, which I found refreshing.

You can check it out in our Friday Wrap, which comes out in about three hours. It’s totally free, and you can register for it here. If you’re getting ready for this summer’s big exam, it’s must reading. But really, if you are in any part of the football business, we recommend you register for our weekly newsletter. We don’t think you’ll be sorry.

Welcome to June, and the unofficial end of NFL scout and executive hiring (and firing) season. Though it started a little slow, it was an exciting month of May, filled with intrigue and projection, much like the month of April.

As of the latest move we reported today, we’ve tracked 112 moves (promotions, reassignments, hirings and firings). About a hundred is the over/under for most springs.

Now that the National Football Scouting and BLESTO meetings are over, we can take a fuller look at the teams that reconfigured their scouting departments and make a few observations (most of them prompted by recent GM hires). Hopefully you joined Orlando Alzugaray and myself on SiriusXM’s Mad Dog Radio last weekend as we ran everything down. But if you didn’t, here’s a quick overview.

A few things to add:

• The biggest story-that-turned-out-to-be-a-non-story was in Oakland, where we heard since before the draft that the arrival of Jon Gruden meant a lot of rancor and unrest in the front office. A month later, however, everyone is still in place. It’s possible this is because all scouts are still under contract and owner Mark Davis didn’t want to write a bunch of checks. We’ll continue to monitor things there.
• Also, as ESPN’s Jordan Raanan pointed out on Twitter Thursday, the Giants have a few assignment shifts and moves they’ll be announcing soon, maybe today. New GM Dave Gettleman mostly went status quo in Year 1 back in New York, though several scouts were given one-year, prove-it deals, and may not be back to see the 2020 draft.
• There are still a few teams making lesser moves, mainly replacing combine scouts and scouting assistants. They include the Chargers and 49ers, though there may be a couple more (here’s one of the Chargers moves, announced today). However, we don’t anticipate any true headline-grabbing hires.

To check out the most comprehensive listing of who went where on the Internet, including moves (sometimes) still to be reported, check out the 2018 ITL Scouting Changes Grid. To check out the movement every year since 2014, the first year we started tracking things comprehensively, click here.

Also, for a look at how quickly some teams turned things around after a GM change or a major front office hire, take a look at today’s report on ITL. We’ll also analyze this year’s moves further and put them in the context of recent turnover in today’s Friday Wrap. It will be out this evening, and you can register for it here.

This spring, we took on the tough task of asking active NFL scouts and evaluators to fill out a completely anonymous survey asking them about their respective salaries and benefit packages. Our aim was simple: we respect the job scouts do, we were curious, we thought it would be helpful, and shoot, no one else was doing it.

Before we presented our results, we wanted to look at what assistant coaches make. Though no one is comparing the heat head coaches and GMs have to take to what scouts face, assistant coaches typically work in greater anonymity and deal a lot more with pure football than others. For that reason, they seemed like the closest parallel.

Figuring out what they make isn’t easy. This article seems to set the floor for assistant coaches at around $300,000, or about double what most senior area scouts make. That seems about right, though we’ve not been able to research it thoroughly.

Here’s what our survey told us about today’s area scouts.

• 6-10 years’ experience: We got 13 responses from scouts who’ve been in the league between six and 10 years. All but one were on two-year deals, the de rigeur contract length for most evaluators. Only one reported having served or presently serving in a director-level role (Director of College Scouting, Pro Director, Director of Player Personnel or AGM/GM). There was a wide variety of salaries: one made less than $50K last year; one made less than $65,000; two others were between $65,000 and $80,000; three made between $80K and $100K; two were between $100,000 and $125,000; and four made $125,000 or more despite having a decade or less in the game. More than half (seven) are employed by a team with a pension plan; all have at least some form of 401(k) match, with most (four each) either having a five percent team match or a match up to an unknown amount. Standard per diem (10 of 13 surveyed) was between $50-$59 while on the road, and car allowances were all over the map, ranging from none to a company car to various car allowances ranging mostly between $500-$700.
• 11-15 years’ experience: Ten scouts with 11-15 years in the business responded. Their respective lengths of contract were divided pretty evenly between one (3), two (4) and three years (3), and none had served in an executive role. One, surprisingly, made less than $50,000 in the last year. Three made between $100,000 and $125,000 per year, and the rest (6) were at $125K or more. Six of 10 had no pension plan; five of 10 made 3-5 percent match on their 401(k); and six made $50-$59 on per diem. Six of 10 had a car allowance of $600 or more.
• 16 years or more: We had 14 respondents to our survey in this bracket. Eleven of 13 are on two-year deals. Most (8) had some director-level experience on their resume. When it comes to salaries, there was surprising diversity. Though nine of 14 are making $125,000 or more and three are in the $100K-$125K range, one scout fell in the $65,000-$80,000 range and another was in the $80,000-$100,000 range. Eleven of 14 have some form of pension; seven of 14 have a 401(k) match up to an unspecified match (four have basic match, while one each have 3 percent, 5 percent and ‘other). Nine of 12 make a per diem rate of $50-$59 (the others, $49 or less) and most (8) make $600 and up for a car allowance.

We’ll compile the answers to our other questions regarding playoff shares, Super Bowl tickets and contracts with lockout stipulations (among others) in the pages of ITL, or here, soon. In the meantime, we hope this provides a snapshot of scouting salaries that may not be comprehensive, but at least better than nothing.

Though the chatter on Draft Twitter seems to indicate that Oklahoma QB Baker Mayfield will be the top pick in the draft, there’s still a fair amount of uncertainty about what the Browns will do at No. 1. With that in mind, we asked several former scouts what they would do. Here’s what they told us:

Jeff Bauer (Jets): “Obviously, there is not a consensus of who the best QB is, if you should take the sure thing in (Penn State OH Saquon) Barkley, or even the best DE in (N.C. State DE Bradley) Chubb. Here is what I know: without a high-caliber QB, it is very unlikely you will win a Super Bowl. There have been exceptions, but you can count those times on one hand. Now, which QB? Do you draft the least ideal physical specimen who won more than the other ‘physically preferred QBs?’ That is what every GM, coach, owner is asking today who has a top 10 pick. For my money, you have to go with your gut on who is the smartest, best leader type that will win games. (Seahawks QB) Russell Wilson and (Saints QB) Drew Brees have proven you do not have to be 6’4 to win championships. I have not sat in a room for hours with these QBs like the guys making the decisions today have, but I would think when it comes time for me to turn in that card, it is going to be the guy they felt best about with leadership, smarts, and resilience to come back from mistakes.”

Danton Barto (Rams): “I would take Barkley the RB and grab the QB with the 4th.”

Ryan Hollern (Saints, Bills): “Has to be a quarterback. It’s a quarterback/head coach-driven league. You need to have a franchise guy in the building. Plus, they pick the guy they want from this talented class.”

Bruce Kebric (Raiders): “I would take the best player (Barkley) unless my team was a talented one.  An excellent running back can take a lot of pressure off of a quarterback, particularly an inexperienced one who the Browns can select at No. 4. I always use my experience of what Earl Campbell did for the Oilers and Dan Pastorini.  Of recent note is Dallas with Ezekiel Elliott and Dak Prescott.”

Matt Manocherian (Browns, Saints): “It depends on how you feel about the quarterbacks, and since I’m not 100 percent in love with any of them, I would try to trade out and hope to land Chubb at 4. He’s my favorite player in the draft, and I’d feel comfortable taking him at 1 if I couldn’t get good trade value. If you love one of the QBs, that has to be your move. For me, I like Mayfield and Rosen over the other top prospects. And even though I now often get pegged as an ‘analytics’ guy, I’m not in the camp that’s vehemently opposed to taking Barkley high. He’s a good football player who changed Penn State’s offense as soon as he saw the field, he creates matchups, and he has obvious value on all four downs. I wouldn’t want a team in my division to draft him.”

Bob Morris (49ers, Browns): “The consensus best player in the draft is Barkley from Penn State. I would take him with the first pick if I did not have a consensus on which QB is the best. Browns can still come back and get one of top 3 QBs at #4. The RB will help, whoever is the QB.”

Josh Washburn (Redskins): “As far as Cleveland goes, they’re in a pretty good spot. I would look into trading down. They’re still in a good position at #4 to get a pretty good player whether it be their franchise QB or someone else to make them better. Plus, they’d pick up more picks to go with their surplus in the first two rounds and help recover some of what they lost by picking up (WO Jarvis) Landry and (QB Tyrod) Taylor.”